No, of course not a typo. $20mil over 5 seasons for a truly elite talent is nothing to recoup in endorsements and just future contracts down the line by making sure you're getting your career off to a great start with a great franchise.
Unless the gap the Kings could offer a player was truly significant (like 5/100 for Peterson and the Lakers could be at 5/40), every single elite prospect will link up with a big time franchise for the betterment of their career.
Kings with a bigger budget (assuming this is where this whole scenario is going) that the bad teams get will be in play for the next tier of guys to overpay them. But them, NOP/WAS/UTA won't ever get a look again at top 5 of the class.
you said "elite talent", but your salary estimates (5 years/40 million vs. 5 years/60 million) sound like they are for elite COLLEGE talent, signing their first contract. currently, i believe the contract numbers are set (in the CBA?) but i think the first contract is limited to four years. elsewhere you refer to the "top five", meaning, i assume, in the draft.
i disagree that 20 million is "nothing" - on the contrary, even guys drafted in the top five don't know if they will ever GET a max contract and i believe that most would take the additional 20 mil no matter WHERE it meant they would have to play (for a few years). I know Ace Bailey told utah not to draft him, but those cases are rare. Now, once a player MAKES IT and is considered "an elite pro talent", well, yeah, they are going to pick and choose. But not (i don't think) on a first contract.
which is why, as i said on another thread, if i have the #3 pick, i definitely trade down, hopefully just to #5 or #6 and then i trade down again maybe to #11 or #12 (and hopefully bank a couple of future #1's), mostly because of "the fox factor", that even a marginally elite player will sign now, but leave first chance they get.
now, if we could just find a giannis or khawai or (or better yhet, a DBook, who might stay) in the late lottery.